CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Why are the hate speech criteria on forum.hr so inconsistent?

Why are the hate speech criteria on forum.hr so inconsistent?

Started by rowdyhawk10 · · 👁 7 views · 45 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants rowdyhawk10hollowtrucker77crimsonhound80boldgardener93steeleagle70Eric Collins5Jeremy Young19Nicholas Kinghollowdriver18Steven Clark2Brenda Cook4Matthew Anderson4Terry Parker8
Matthew Anderson4 Matthew Anderson4 Regular
598 messages
joined Jun 2013
#41 ·
hollowtrucker77 said:
@sarafciger got banned for his post. Still checking with the mods to see why it took this long to actually react.

I don't get it. He posted that back on May 21st and got flagged almost immediately. You're really hitting him with a penalty now, like, a month and a half later?
Terry Parker8 Terry Parker8 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Jun 2009
#42 ·
rowdyhawk10 said:Brenda Cook4, I really feel bad that you're writing like that... unless you've actually read all of his posts? Most of what Viseslav3—who's basically just an Ivanov clone—posts is pure hate speech aimed at... Making generalizations. The way to... Everything about Muslims.... like some "backward group that's bound to vanish one day"... whatever. These posts are nothing but pure political tension. They have zero to do with actual spiritual growth or any kind of soulful development.

Here is just one example: John (Viseslav3) here He claims that being Muslim is synonymous with ignorance. What exactly counts as pure generalization and disparaging an entire group? Look, there are professors, scientists, artists, and humanitarian workers within the Muslim community—highly educated people whose values you used to point out yourself. So now, suddenly, according to him, ignorance is just a synonym for being Muslim? Isn't that exactly what generalizing looks like? 🙄 And in the rest of that same post, he goes even further—he actually claims that if Muslims were his neighbors, they’d burn his house down. Seriously?

How much of this is actually untrue, and how little does it have to do with any "spiritual or religious aspects"? Honestly, do we even need to go there? You find Muslims in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Berlin... it doesn't change anyone's life or burn down their house. If someone is out there setting fires to other people's homes, they aren't a religious figure—they're just a criminal who belongs in a prison cell or a mental institution. Besides, this clone didn't even claim that someone was going to burn his own house down. Just some Muslims. (For example, calling people Islamic fanatics, Taliban, Wahhabis... basically, he didn't hold anything back!) He already generalized the whole group, implying that Muslims would burn his house down and torch his yard. Isn't that exactly what generalizing and inciting hatred looks like? I reported that post too, but it hasn't been removed yet.

That’s just one single post from John (Viseslav3). If you really want, I can pull a full list of his hate speech and personal attacks against other users on the forum—stuff that has never even been flagged (or at least, I haven't seen it happen yet). For instance: hereAccording to him, Muslims aren't human.Then, again, here He tells another forum member (also a Muslim) that he's like the "last man standing." You can find dozens of similar instances where people just resort to personal insults to belittle others on the forum, for example: here (Lone wolf), here or hereI'm not going to link everything here. Seriously, has this guy ever written a single post on any other topic without dragging Muslims into it and taking a cheap shot at them?

I should also remind you that you gave Nick a full 100 points just because he wrote, "What's even human about atheists?"I can't see any link here. If you want me to work on something, go ahead and drop it.And the reason given was: "Belittling an entire group.Look, let’s be clear: I’d give Sabur an A+ for that post, because what he said was absolutely disgusting. But then you have this clone, John (Viseslav3), writing about Muslims with generalizations that are actually way worse than anything Sabur put out there—yet you never seem to sanction him. It feels like if I were a moderator, I’d be protecting one group while basically terrorizing Christians and everyone else. It’s just blatant bias.

The idea that John (Viseslav3) actually "knows the subject he’s criticizing" is honestly laughable. On the convert thread, some dervish spent pages explaining parental status to him—arguing that whether a parent is Muslim or not, they should still be seen as charitable... yet John here just keeps blowing the same tired horn. It’s not that I dislike him, I just don't think his claims qualify as libel. 🤷

Besides, why are you letting this guy (John) post under a clone account (Viseslav3) when the rules clearly forbid it? I’ve reported him multiple times for being a clone, and everyone on the forum knows it. I even asked in the "Complaint Book" thread why he was allowed to use a clone, and you deleted my post. Now you’re admitting it is a clone. How does that work? Am I allowed to use two or three different handles if everyone knows they belong to me? Regards 🙂


Hypocrisy regarding generalizations? Please. 🙄🙄

Back then, the moderator had the authority to call a specific religious group (in this case, Christians and Catholics) fascists, Nazis, and genocidal without anyone batting an eye. ...except for his, naturally.

Furthermore, Adolf Hitler identified himself as a staunch Catholic (according to his own words, which are documented)... and even the symbol of Nazism takes the shape of a cross, doesn't it? Then there's the fact that Italy was the cradle of fascism. For decades, European nations were colonizers of Africa and Asia, and they still act like it today. They carried out genocides across multiple continents... you only have to look at the Maya and Aztec civilizations and what happened to the people of Latin America. Truly, there really isn't a religion in human history where the followers have spilled as much blood, committed as much genocide, or used as much violence... as Christianity.

rowdyhawk10, you're the last person who should be pointing fingers at others.

...but then again, you've always been more concerned with other people's reputation than your own.
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#43 ·
Matthew Anderson4 said:I just don't get it—he posted that back on May 21st, got his warning and the strike right then and there, and everything seemed settled. It doesn't make any sense that you're coming back to penalize the exact same post a month and a half later, does it?

Of course not.
🙂
Brenda Cook4 Brenda Cook4 Regular
373 messages
joined Sep 2010
#44 ·
rowdyhawk10 said:Fine, it’s probably better that I’m not banning him over that specific post. From what I recall, back when he called Muslims "lazy"—he didn't get banned then, just a 45-point deduction for a personal attack rather than hate speech. Meanwhile, on the flip side, harrybonnot got hit with 500 points for a much more harmless post, all under the label of "hate speech."

Look, I’d simply ask hollowtrucker77 to put those two posts side-by-side. Let them explain why one gets 500 points for "hate speech" while the other only gets 45 for a "personal attack." That inconsistency is exactly why I started this thread in the first place. To me, the criteria just don't add up.

What are you even talking about now? Which post? Did I personally sanction him? Please, send me the link.

And honestly, this is your recurring issue—claiming that harrybonnot's post was "far more harmless." It’s the same pattern over and over: "I would have given Harry a red card too, but... but... but..." It might be worth reading his post one more time.

And without even quoting your other post here—why are you bringing up (and reporting) a clone of Viseslav? Is he actually banned as Master John? No, he isn't. So that's what we're discussing. Is he currently posting in the religion section under the MASTER's nickname? No. So what are we really talking about? Are you noticing the other clones? No? How is that possible?

Like I said, what I truly dislike is seeing the PZK used as a weapon against anyone who doesn't share our views. This is pure intimidation, and it's certainly not the first time.
hollowdriver18 hollowdriver18 Active Member
82 messages
joined Apr 2010
#45 ·
One thing I honestly don't get 🙂

Where does rowdyhawk10 find the nerve to keep dragging up those same old topics? He keeps whining about supposed inconsistencies in the rules, even though we've all seen his entire track record over the years during his tenure —especially when he was acting as a moderator before being removed
.
People still give him the time of day and let him take up space, yet there he is, still playing the victim and acting like he's being threatened
.
How long is this actually going to go on? 🤷
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#46 ·
What actually matters here is having a consistent set of standards within a specific subforum and ensuring the moderators are genuinely pulling their weight to stay objective
Every single subforum attracts a completely different crowd with its own unique level of volatility, which makes it fundamentally impossible to slap one rigid, universal rulebook over the entire site and expect it to work
Then you’ve got the issue of context, because you can't just pluck a single sentence out of a thread and pretend that's the whole story without looking at the surrounding environment
You simply can't measure people with a ruler, and trying to weigh complex human interactions on some kind of clinical scale is a fool's errand

Look, mistakes are going to happen, and they'll probably keep happening, but the real goal should be making an honest effort to fix them—and frankly, that's the bare minimum anyone should be expected to deliver

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads